More stories

  • in

    Is the Biden Administration Coming for Chrome?

    The Justice Department is reportedly targeting Google’s web browser as its antitrust enforcers seek to cement a major win before Donald Trump takes office.Can the Biden administration’s antitrust enforcers succeed in breaking up Google before they leave office?Josh Edelson/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA parting antitrust shot by Biden’s enforcersBefore the Biden administration’s antitrust leaders step down, they’re taking their final shots at Big Tech. That will reportedly include an effort to break up Google as a consequence of the Justice Department’s successful competition lawsuit against the company.A forthcoming request to force the sale of the Chrome browser, according to Bloomberg, would be one of the most sweeping competition demands in years. But it will also be a test of the second Trump administration’s own antitrust agenda.Chrome is a crucial part of Google’s business. The industry’s dominant web browser — it controls about 61 percent of the U.S. market, according to Bloomberg — is a potent data-collection portal, steering people to the company’s search engine. That gives Google the ability to track users when they are signed in, and can be used to for targeted ads.Chrome has also become a gateway for Google’s A.I. services, including its Gemini chatbot, which some say could eventually follow user activity across the web.The Justice Department decided against requesting the divestiture of Google’s Android smartphone operating system, Bloomberg reports. But it wants the company to stop bundling it with services including search and the Google Play app store.If successful, the split would cement a crucial legacy for Biden’s antitrust team. It’s unclear how much of the aggressive approach promoted by Lina Khan of the F.T.C. and Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department will survive. A Chrome divestiture would achieve the kind of corporate breakup that regulators failed to force upon Microsoft two decades ago.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    The Onion Buys Alex Jones’s Infowars Out of Bankruptcy

    The satirical news site planned to turn Infowars into a parody of itself, mocking “weird internet personalities” who peddle conspiracy theories and health supplements.The Onion, a satirical publication that skewers newsmakers and current events, said on Thursday that it had won a bankruptcy auction to acquire Infowars, a website founded and operated by the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.The Onion said that the bid was sanctioned by the families of the victims of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, who in 2022 won a $1.4 billion defamation lawsuit against Mr. Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems.Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit dedicated to ending gun violence that was founded in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting, will advertise on a relaunched version of the site under The Onion.The publication plans to reintroduce Infowars in January as a parody of itself, mocking “weird internet personalities” like Mr. Jones who traffic in misinformation and health supplements, Ben Collins, the chief executive of The Onion’s parent company, Global Tetrahedron, said in an interview.Family members of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting, which claimed the lives of 20 first graders and six educators, sued Mr. Jones in Connecticut Superior Court in 2018 after he spread the baseless claim that the rampage was a fabricated pretext for confiscating Americans’ firearms.The Onion declined to disclose the price it paid for Infowars and its assets, including its production studio and diet supplement business. Mr. Jones could not immediately be reached for comment, but he said on the social media platform X this week that he planned to continue producing his online program, “The Alex Jones Show,” until he was forced to stop.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Tapestry and Capri End Plans for ‘Accessible Luxury’ Merger

    Tapestry, the owner of Coach, said it would abandon its $8.5 billion deal to buy Capri, the parent company of Michael Kors, after the Federal Trade Commission successfully sued to stop the transaction.An attempt to assemble an “accessible luxury” powerhouse in the United States has unraveled.Tapestry, the owner of Coach and Kate Spade, and Capri Holdings, the parent company of Versace and Michael Kors, on Thursday called off their plan to merge, which was first announced last year. The Federal Trade Commission had sued to block the $8.5 billion deal last spring over antitrust concerns, and a federal judge sided with the agency last month.At the center of the F.TC’s case was a worry that consumers would end up paying more for the relatively less expensive handbags and other fashion items sold by Coach, Kate Spade and Michael Kors in what the industry calls the accessible luxury market.While Tapestry and Capri argued that it was not a defined category, the federal judge ruled that accessible luxury handbags appeared to have traits that distinguished them from true luxury brands. The court determined that the category was defined by bags that start with a price of about $100 and “heavily rely on discounting.”Tapestry and Capri said that they had “mutually agreed that terminating the merger agreement was in the best interests of both companies.” The decision to abandon their appeal suggested that the companies were not more optimistic about a judge’s ruling under the Trump administration, and that they did not think putting in the time and money required by a lengthy appeal process would result in a viable pathway to acquisition.“We are now focusing on the future of Capri and our three iconic luxury houses,” John Idol, Capri’s chief executive, said in a statement. Mr. Idol stressed Capri’s strong customer loyalty and store base, with more than 1,200 retail locations worldwide.Joanne Crevoiserat, the chief executive of Tapestry, said in a statement that “we have always had multiple paths to growth, and our decision today clarifies the forward strategy.”“Tapestry remains in a position of strength,” she added.Tapestry also said its board had approved a program in which the company would buy an additional $2 billion of its own shares.The company’s shares rose about 10 percent, and shares of Capri fell 4 percent, in early trading on Thursday. More

  • in

    What a Matt Gaetz Justice Department Would Mean for Business

    The Trump loyalist supports an “aggressive” antitrust approach and has called for breaking up Big Tech. But can the controversial nominee win Senate approval?Matt Gaetz may be Donald Trump’s most surprising and contentious pick yet to join his cabinet.Mike Blake/ReutersA “disrupter” for the Justice DepartmentMatt Gaetz is known for his outspoken defenses of Donald Trump, numerous scandals and a House ethics investigation. He can now add another distinction: being the president-elect’s pick to be nominee for attorney general.It isn’t clear whether Gaetz, perhaps the most divisive of Trump’s cabinet choices so far, will get Senate confirmation. But if he does, he could keep corporate America on its toes.Trump and his allies see the position of attorney general as especially important, given the president-elect’s numerous legal woes.The Times reports that Trump weighed more traditional candidates, including Jay Clayton, who was S.E.C. chair in his first administration, and Bob Giuffra, a co-chair of the white-shoe law firm Sullivan & Cromwell. But he ultimately chose a loyalist who supported efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.Gaetz “is a disrupter,” said Representative Chip Roy, Republican of Texas, praising Trump’s selection. Gaetz, who resigned from his position as representative of Florida last night, repeatedly challenged Republican leaders, picked fights with Democrats and pulled off stunts like trying to barge into the secure chambers for the House Intelligence Committee.Will he go after Trump’s perceived enemies, including in business? In his announcement on social media, Trump said that Gaetz would “dismantle Criminal Organizations” as part of a mission to bring “desperately needed reform at the Department of Justice.” On X, Elon Musk wrote that “the Hammer of Justice is coming.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    How FTC Chair Lina Khan Became an Election Hot Topic

    The Federal Trade Commission chair drew increasing political vitriol as the presidential vote neared. Her political future hangs in the balance.In the run-up to the election, Lina Khan, chair of the Federal Trade Commission, was called a dope, partisan and unhelpful by Democrats and Republicans. Democratic donors including the billionaires Reid Hoffman, Barry Diller and Mark Cuban called for her ouster from the agency. Last week, a report from the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee accused her of having a far-left agenda and weaponizing the agency.Ms. Khan “will be fired soon,” Elon Musk, the owner of X and a supporter of former President Donald J. Trump, wrote on his platform on Thursday.Few government officials elicited such intense bipartisan attention ahead of the election, making speculation regarding the future of Ms. Khan — nominated in 2021 by President Biden — one of the most avid parlor games in Washington.The fixation on Ms. Khan, 35, is uncommon for a leader at the long-under-the-radar F.T.C., which regulates companies that subvert competition and deceive consumers. It reflects the high stakes of the Biden administration’s wide-ranging program to dampen the power of America’s biggest corporations — which either presidential candidate could reverse if victorious.Scrutiny from the F.T.C. and the Justice Department has led to the collapse of billions of dollars in recent corporate deals. Lawsuits filed by the agencies could break up big American brands like Google, Amazon and the parent company of Ticketmaster. Ms. Khan has argued to regulate artificial intelligence, ordered companies to make it easier to cancel online subscriptions and banned noncompete agreements, which stop workers from taking a job with a rival employer.The backlash from the business world and its Washington allies has been fierce — and it ramped up before the vote.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Comcast Explores Spin-Out of Cable Business

    The company’s president, Mike Cavanagh, said the company was also considering finding a partner for its Peacock streaming service.Comcast, one of the nation’s biggest television companies, said on Thursday that it was weighing whether to cleave its cable networks from the rest of the company, a move that could put it in position to shake up the struggling cable industry.Mike Cavanagh, the company’s president, said on an earnings call that the company could put the cable networks owned by its NBCUniversal division — which include Syfy, Bravo and USA — into a new company.As Americans continue to drop their cable TV subscriptions, cable networks are generally considered the most problematic part of traditional media businesses like NBCUniversal.“Like many of our peers in media, we are experiencing the effects of the transition in our video businesses, and we have been studying the best path forward for these assets,” Mr. Cavanagh said.Mr. Cavanagh said that the new company would be owned by Comcast shareholders and that it would be “well capitalized” — implying that it would not be loaded up with debt from its parent company, a common tactic for corporate spinoffs. NBC — a broadcast network owned by Comcast — would probably not fit into the new company.His comments came after Comcast reported a 3.3 percent decrease in net income last quarter, even as revenue increased by 6.5 percent, to $32 billion. The company reported losses of 87,000 U.S. customers for its broadband services compared with the same period last year, and cable TV subscribers continued to decrease. The company’s share price was up nearly 3 percent in midmorning trading.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Profits Leap at Goldman Sachs as Banks See Steady Economy

    The investment bank earned more than expected in the latest quarter, a theme for other big banks, too.Goldman Sachs on Tuesday reported a monster jump in its third quarter earnings, reaping $3 billion in profits — far higher than what Wall Street analysts had expected.How did the investment bank do it? The steadying economic environment helped — but so did a financial maneuver employed by Goldman’s chief executive, David M. Solomon, a few weeks ago.In early September, Mr. Solomon publicly sounded the alarm, saying many aspects of the bank’s business were stumbling in the third quarter. He warned that the bank’s upcoming earnings might disappoint.They didn’t — not at Goldman nor the two other major banks that reported results on Tuesday.Up first, a billion-dollar beatGoldman pulled in nearly $13 billion in revenue during the third quarter, over $1 billion more than projections. The bank’s $3 billion in quarterly profit was roughly equal to what it pulled in during the previous quarter, despite Mr. Solomon’s warning last month that profits might not hold up as well as they had in the first half of the year.A bank executive, briefing reporters on the condition of anonymity, said that trading activity — a core part of any investment bank — came in stronger than expected in September, the same period that the Federal Reserve announced a large cut in interest rates.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Can Lina Khan Hold On?

    Ms. Khan’s term as the chair of the Federal Trade Commission ended Wednesday. In a wide-ranging interview, she discussed her aggressive approach to antitrust and its critics.From Wall Street to Silicon Valley, everyone wants to know what’s next for Lina Khan.On Wednesday, the youngest-ever chair of the Federal Trade Commission reached the end of her three-year term, during which she helped to overhaul the government’s approach to antitrust enforcement and brought a slew of lawsuits against major corporations.Ms. Khan, 35, can remain in her seat indefinitely, unless she is replaced. There are factions rooting loudly for each of those outcomes.Under her leadership, the F.T.C. has brought antitrust cases against the tech giants Meta, Amazon and Microsoft, sometimes employing ambitious legal arguments. The agency has tried to ban almost all noncompete clauses and blocked Lockheed Martin and Nvidia from making multibillion-dollar deals.A powerful bipartisan cohort believes the F.T.C. chair is stretching the scope of antitrust law past its legitimate limits, rashly working to redefine the bounds of key concepts such as monopolization.Ms. Khan, her staff and her allies essentially contend the opposite: that her leadership is restoring the role of robust, active antitrust enforcement in a legal and economic system that for too long has let those regulatory muscles atrophy to the detriment of consumers and healthier market competition. Consumer watchdogs and some conservatives have cheered on Ms. Khan, defending her populist moves, like the agency’s recent warning to makers of inhalers that their aggressive use of patent loopholes may violate federal law.Some Democratic donors connected to finance and tech, however, have publicly campaigned for Vice President Kamala Harris to remove Ms. Khan as chair of the F.T.C., if she wins the presidential election in November. Her campaign declined to comment on whether she would support Ms. Khan’s staying in the position.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More